[markboo]

As a tech lead, from last year, all my new hire interview is fundamentally changed, no concept, no algo, no design. Just a real world problem, even not clearly defined yet, allow candidate use any AI tool they like, ask me questions or do research for problem clarification, and work it out. I'm watching all this process in 1-1.5 hours to see if he is a problem solver. 99% will be solved by AI with your proactivaly and smart prompt or questions in current work, so the thinking and prompting process is key.

[nm980]

> 99% will be solved by AI with your proactivaly and smart prompt or questions in current work, so the thinking and prompting process is key.

I am still a junior but this seems like you are interviewing the AI rather than the candidate. Also why bother with a technical interview if you expect AI to do their job?

[markboo]

Actually not a real technical interview for this case, it's a real world problem solving, including business analysis(for the uncleared problem), coding, and testing to deliver to me. What I'm looking for a individual builder(or a one-person tech team) instead of an expert on a specific tech stack.

[red-iron-pine]

so then what do you do if you need an expert on a specific tech stack?

we got database and mainframe legacy code and I need someone who gets that world, not a plucky undergrad who is strong in "prompt engineering"

[shaewest]

It's interviewing the capacity to use the tools in a useful manor rather testing the tools themselves.

[sedev]

How has that worked out? What are you looking at when you compare that to what you were doing before last year?

[VirusNewbie]

This is so fucking dumb you're going to hire a candidate who got A/B tested into the 'smarter' SoTA model or something.